1. Word order variation in Latin verb clusters: a diachronic perspective Lieven Danckaert (UGent, GIST)

2. 1. Introduction Empirical focus of the talk is the syntax of objects (O’s), non-finite verbs (V’s) and auxiliaries (Aux’s) in Latin. More specifically, I will look at the diachronic evolution of two so-called ‘head-final sequences’, as in (1): (1)legati urbem ingressi sunt.SOVAux 'The ambassadors entered the city.' (= Liv. aUc. 45.2.3) In this example, two complements precede their heads: Head-final sequence I: VP-Aux [ TP [ VP urbem ingressi] sunt] Head-final sequence II: OV [ VP urbem ingressi]

3. 1. Introduction In classical Latin, both the head-final and the head-initial orders were available for both structures involved: (2)a. Illae Minoem occiderunt.OV 'These women killed Minos.' (= Hyg. Fab. 44) b. etiamsi meritooccidit hominemVO 'even if he was right in killing the man.' (= Sen. rhet. Contr. 1.2.14) (3)a. Non est moratus Stichus.AuxVP 'Stichus did not stay around.' (= Petr. Sat. 78) b. In uita moratus est.VPAux 'He stayed alive.' (= Sen. Ep. 93.3)

4. 1. Introduction Observation: the structure [[OV]Aux] is the statistically predominant pattern in classical Latin, but it is lost absent from the modern Romance languages, where [Aux[VO]] is almost completely generalized Aim of the talk: reconstruct part of this evolution, concentrating on the period 100 BC – 550 AD Main empirical result: whereas a clear decline of the order VPAux can be observed, no such evolution takes place for the pattern OV The latter result is at odds with standard claims in the literature (cf. section 5 below)

5. Overview 1. Introduction: aims of the talk and background assumptions 2. Latin clause structure: object positions 3. A large-scale corpus study: methodology and corpus description 4. Head-final sequence I: VP-Aux 5. Head-final sequence II: OV 6. Conclusion

6. 2. Latin clause structure Background assumption: Latin as a (i) discourse (ii) configurational language Discourse: much of the very flexible properties of Latin word order are to be explained in terms of information structure Rule of thumb: different position => different interpretation Configurationality Hierarchical structure (brackets, trees), not just the linear string For instance: existence of a VP constituent (coordination, preposing, pronominalization, relativization: cf. handout for some examples) As a result, discourse notions like ‘Topic’ and ‘Focus’ are likely to be configurationally realized in specialized discourse projections

7. 2. Latin clause structure Observation: there is more than one object position (4)Non enim a uapore umor corrumpere poterit SVAuxO materiem contignationis. 'For the moisture from the heat cannot affect the timbering.' (= Vitr. Arch. 5.10.3) (5)cum testamento scriptus heres euincere SVOAux hereditatem possit. '... since because of the testament the appointed heir can to recover the heritage.' (= Gai. Inst. 3.36) (6)quin seruus beneficium dare possit [...]. SOVAux ‘that a slave.’ (= Sen. Ben. 3.19.1) (7)ut nullam calamitatem res publica accipere possit [...]. OSVAux 'so that the state could not suffer any disaster.' (= Cic. Phil. 7.20)

8. 2. Latin clause structure The different object positions we identified could be represented with the following templates: (8)a. OBJ1S OBJ2V -fin OBJ3AuxOBJ4 b. OBJ1S OBJ2V +fin OBJ3OBJ4 Consider now (9-10): (9) Pisum coques. 'Cook the peas.' (= Apic. Res coq. 5.3.3) (10)Adicies oleum. 'Add oil.' (= Apic. Res coq. 5.2.2)

9. 2. Latin clause structure In the light of the templates in (8), we have to conclude that the constituency of sentences like (9-10) cannot be determined: (8)a. OBJ1S OBJ2AuxOBJ3V -fin OBJ4 b. OBJ1S OBJ2V +fin OBJ3OBJ4  As a result, sentences like (9-10) should not be taken up in a study that investigates object positions  only sentences with a non-finite verb and at least one auxiliary are really useful: in these, V and T can be told apart, and object positions can be evaluated with respect to (at least) two reference points

10. 3. A corpus study Data from LASLA database (‘Laboratoire d’Analyse Statistique des Langues Anciennes’, Université de Liège; http://www.cipl.ulg.ac.be/Lasla/index.html)http://www.cipl.ulg.ac.be/Lasla/index.html Other: www.brepolis.net (BTL)www.brepolis.net In this study: selection of Latin prose texts Texts from the classical period not (yet) included in the LASLA corpus (Vitruvius, Frontinus, Gaius) Late Latin texts (from Palladius (ca. 350 AD) to Iordanes (ca. 550 AD))

11. 3. A corpus study

12. What went in the sample? all two- or three-member clusters consisting of (i) a modal auxiliary (in most cases), (ii) an infinitive, and (iii), when the selected infinitive is transitive, the complement of this infinitive Why auxiliaries that take an infinitival complement? frequently used => guaranteed to have a lot of tokens relatively easy to find in a corpus Which auxiliaries (see handout for details)? possum and debeo for long texts for shorter texts, possum and debeo, supplemented with uolo, soleo, incipio, nolo, desino, audeo, conor, malo, in order to at least gather ca. 25 three-member clusters

13. 3. A corpus study

14. 4. Head-final sequence I: VPAux

15. Average rates of AuxVP: - earlier period : 37,85% - later period: 65,92% Statistically significant? Yes (Independent samples t-test, p =.004)

16. 5. Head-final sequence II: VO The data in Ledgeway (2012: ch. 5) suggest the following frequencies for the order OV (details see handout): early Latin (ca. 100 BC – 100 AD, 22 text samples): 73,4% late Latin (ca. 350 – 450 AD, 5 text samples): 36,3% The difference between those two average frequencies is statistically significant (t-test for independent samples, p<.001) A different picture emerges if we look at object positions in clauses with an infinitival verb and an auxiliary…

17. 5. Head-final sequence II: VO

18. Average rates of VO: - earlier period : 26,72%, - later period: 32,05% Statistically significant? No (Independent samples t-test, p =.449)

19. 6. Discussion How can we account for the high frequencies of VO in later texts if clauses with synthetic verbs are taken into account (cfr. Ledgeway’s data)? Not only more than one object position, also more than one position for finite verbs: (11)quin seruus beneficium dare possit [...]. SOVAux ‘that a slave can.' (= Sen. Ben. 3.19.1-2) (12) potest mater eius causam probare.AuxSOV 'his mother is allowed to prove the case.' (= Gai. Inst. 1.32) presumably also for lexical (synthetic) finite verbs (13)Interfecit Opimius Gracchum.VSO 'Opimius killed Gracchus.' (= Cic. de Or. 2.132)

20. 6. Discussion This gives rise to the following (partial!) linear templates; this is what we had earlier: (8)a. OBJ1S OBJ2V -fin OBJ3AuxOBJ4 b. OBJ1S OBJ2V +fin OBJ3OBJ4 with additional verb positions: (14)a. Aux1OBJ1SOBJ2V -fin OBJ3 Aux2OBJ4 b. V +fin 1OBJ1SOBJ2V +fin 2OBJ3OBJ4 Hypothesis: the high verb position is the one that was targeted by finite verbs in early Romance ‘V2’-clauses (Benincà 1983-'84, Vanelli, Renzi & Benincà 1985, Adams 1987, Vance 1997, Benincà & Poletto 2010)

21. 6. Discussion In addition, the present data confirm the hypothesis that diachronically, hierarchically higher head-final become head-initial before the head-final sequences they dominate (cf. Sigurðsson 1988; Biberauer et al. 2010):

22. 7. Conclusion The present approach differs in a number of respects from earlier studies: 1.Size of the investigated corpus 2.Linear order is not taken to be a primitive; constituency 3.Attention is paid to the placement of functional material (in casu auxiliaries; also possible: negation, adverbs, conjunctions (cf. Danckaert 2012) These factors allow us to obtain a good understanding of diachronic syntactic facts But of course, much more work needs to be done…

23. 7. Conclusion For future research: look at analytic deponent verbs enlarge the dataset (Livius, Plinius maior, Plinius minor, Celsus and Columella for the earlier period; Digesta, Grégoire de Tours and Fredegarius for the later) take into syntactic factors like clause type and/or illocutionary force embedded vs. main clauses type of O (clause, DP, pronoun) type of V (participles vs. infinitives) type of Aux (BE-auxiliary, different types of modals) language-external factors (register, genre,…) thorough statistic analysis of the data